2nd Bug Expert Bolsters Westerfield Defense: (Dusek Melting Down Before Juries Eyes!!)

NBC/San Diego ^ | July 22, 2002 | NBC/San Diego

[FresnoDA]

2nd Bug Expert Bolsters Westerfield Defense

Expert Says Fly Infestations Show When Danielle's Body Was Dumped

 

POSTED: 6:58 a.m. PDT July 22, 2002

UPDATED: 2:28 p.m. PDT July 22, 2002

 

SAN DIEGO -- The trial of David Westerfield resumed Monday with more testimony about insects, as defense lawyers tried to show that their client was not the person who dumped Danielle van Dam's body along a two-lane road in East County.

Before testimony began, Judge William Mudd warned jurors to ignore last week's murder of a young girl in nearby Orange County. Mudd said that the abduction, sexual assault and murder of 5-year-old Samantha Runnion "bears no relation" to the trial of David Westerfield.

Westerfield's trial had been in recess since July 11 so the judge could take a previously scheduled vacation.

Westerfield, 50, lived two doors from Danielle, who vanished after her father put her to bed the night of Feb. 1. Searchers found the girl's nude body on Feb. 27 along a rural roadside east of San Diego.

A forensic entomologist, testifying Monday for the defense, said Danielle's body could not have been dumped at the roadside before Feb. 12, according to his analysis of flies and larvae collected during an autopsy. The blow flies that were found on the body typically descend on a cadaver shortly after death, but it can take longer in cooler temperatures, entomologist Neal Haskell said. Based on his analysis of the temperatures in the area at the time, Haskell (pictured, right) put "the time of colonization" likely at Feb. 14 and no earlier than Feb. 12.

Prosecutors challenged the defense's weather data.

Haskell's testimony puts the time the body may have been dumped several days earlier than suggested by a previous defense witness, entomologist David Faulkner. The defense has seized upon the time of death, which could not be precisely determined, to suggest that the body was dumped at a time when Westerfield was under constant police surveillance.

Westerfield was put under observation soon after Danielle disappeared, according to police testimony. He was arrested on Feb. 22.

During Haskell's testimony about insects devouring Danielle's body, the girl's parents, Brenda and Damon van Dam, stared at the floor as they sat in the back row of the courtroom. It is the first time that Damon van Dam has been in court since Judge William Mudd banned him from the proceedings almost a month ago as a security risk. Mudd restored his trial privileges just before going on vacation.

Lawyers for Westerfield have said they expect to offer two to three more days of testimony.

[UCANSEE2]

Thanks for the advice. I figured it was so obvious. Just call me newbie. OK. "NEWBIE !". (gee, now I feel better)

BTW, Welcome to the threads on the Danielle/DW case (and kinda Samantha/Avila case).!!!!!!!!

[cyncooper]

I know. I read his/her first post and he/she started right in with personal insults---but not directly--- to those who have a differing opinion. I got tired of it. They have a place where they can gossip the time away and we don't have to have it going on right under our noses. RUDE.

I started reading the other thread and see they just cannot STAND to have anyone point out a flaw in their "thinking". (They call it "disruption") ROTFL

[UCANSEE2]

So virtually no evidence that flies would act differently in a desert environment. No studies, no papers etc .

Yes, actually there were. It was found that they live in tents, and wear 'tiny-little turbans' round their heads. The have a colony of ants they use to ride around on and ferry in water when needed.

They still like rock music, though, whether in hot or cold environments. Food is different though depending on the number of caddies working each day. The more caddies, the more junk food available.

[UCANSEE2]

the chair person of DW is innocent committee is ?

I think that would be ME !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! or, if you are nominating me, I humbly accept.

[dcwusmc]

I have missed a lot of your posts. I have not really followed this situation as much as some. My comments were based on SOME of the posts I have read plus the quickness with which you jumped on the "chairwoman" comment. Plus a general aggravation with posters I HAVE read who seem to have their minds set in concrete before ALL the evidence is in. Personlly, I am neither on his "side" nor the VD's "side." I merely want to see an HONEST trial, something that appears to be lacking here from some of the things I have read.

[UCANSEE2]

We seem to have several 'camps' here. (even though there really should be only one)

One camp states definitively that DW DID it, and the trial is a waste of time. They want DW hung right away, no questions asked. No matter what has happened in the trial, they are still convinced he is guilty and would hang him if they could get near him.

They do not want to wait for the trial to finish to make up their minds.

The other camp states that DW is NOT GUILTY and they have made up their minds. They don't need need to wait for the trial to end either. They have seen enough to come to a conclusion. Both sides are very stubborn and hard-headed about this.

The next 2 camps are kinda one camp. Those that either thought DW did it at first, or thought maybe he didn't , but now having gone through most of the trial, have come to a fairly well informed conclusion.

Of course, then, there is that tiny little camp, way outside of town, that has the few people in it that Didn't know at first whether DW did it, and are waiting until the trial is concluded to finish coming to a conclusion. (wish I was one of them)

ANYWAY, the one camp we all belong to (regardless to what emotion gets people to say) is the camp where we want the REAL KILLER arrested, tried, and if guilty, HUNG BY HIS JEWELS.

Finally, I think you can tell from reading the posts, just who is in what camp. Just asking a poster which camp they are in will usually not get you the REAL answer. Observation is best.

[UCANSEE2]

P.S. WELCOME to the threads on the VD/DW case ! ! ! !!!

[theirjustdue]

"there's a tape of Dehesa site from KUSI TV.....WHO could have been seen in that tape? (Many times, for example, an arsonist sets repeated fires and then shows up in tapes on the news)...just guessing/wondering what could possibly be on the tape ."

You are absolutely correct about arsonist returning to the scene of their crime to watch and such behavioral traits, aren't just limited to arsonist.

Don't know if Feldman has found something, or someone on tape, or is just fishing, hoping to find someone, but, if he finds "Avila" lurking in the crowd, it will be well worth his effort. Avila, BTW, would be my wild guess, as to who he is looking for. JMO

[VRWC_minion]

Yes, actually there were

You don't think its odd that there are two cases of bug guys that put the time of death of a body in the desert about 10 days earlier than all the other evidence ? I do.

[UCANSEE2]

BTW, were you ever at the MCASC in Kansas City?

I had a friend that moved to Cali that was a Marine. His name was Chris (Darrell actually).

[VRWC_minion]

Of course, then, there is that tiny little camp, way outside of town, that has the few people in it that Didn't know at first whether DW did it, and are waiting until the trial is concluded to finish coming to a conclusion. (wish I was one of them)=me.

But I always have an opinion (which is subject to change). An opinion is different than "making up my mind" which I have been accused of but isn't true. My current opinion is that he is guilty based on the physical evidence in the RV. Most of the other crap about how he got in the house etc are all distractions. However, I need an explanation entered in evidence that at least gives some credible reason for the bug guys being wrong.

Without that if I were a juror I would make it a hung jury. No way could I say he wasn't guilty. I would essentially vote for a do-over so the prosecution could back fill the holes in the time of death.

[It's me]

Forensic entomology in Canada is seasonal, that is, it is only commonly used in spring, summer, and fall when insects are abundant. It is of less use in winter, unless its very mild, as there are no or very few insects present.

This crime took place in CALIFORNIA, not Canada. Our winters here are very mild. There are many insects present all year round.

So, your point is?

[PrairieDawg]

Hi. You wrote:

You don't think its odd that there are two cases of bug guys that put the time of death of a body in the desert about 10 days earlier than all the other evidence ? I do.

Which other evidence have you seen in the trial thus far that is completely at odds with the findings of the bug guys? Other than the fact that the SDPD was watching DW 24x7 during the time period the bug guys say that Danielle's body was dumped?

(And, BTW, do we know the whereabouts of DVD during this time period? Just wondering...).

FRegards,
PrairieDawg

[Wednesday's Child]

Yes, Avila was my first thought when I heard about the tape. It's possible someone spotted someone in the crowd, maybe Avila, maybe someone else.

UNCANSEE2 in post 911 had some good theories too.

[It's me]

Given that the desert doesn't offer an attractive set of circumstances for flies to find places to grow I doubt nature would have them waste much time there

You may be right. BUT: How do you explain the golf course which is heavily watered in order to keep the greens green? Do you think flies would find a place to grow around a golf course?

[EllaMinnow]

Obviously, he doesn't.

[UCANSEE2]

You don't think its odd that there are two cases of bug guys that put the time of death of a body in the desert about 10 days earlier than all the other evidence ?

Actually, I don't consider myself enough of a 'bug expert' to judge the actual validity of one expert vs. another.

I think you can have 1 guy testify PRO and one CON and it means nothing. Experts can be found in every field to say what ONE SIDE wants.

The only way I can 'judge' the information/expert opinion of the forensic entomologists, is by OBSERVATION of CIRCUMSTANCE.

By this I mean that the Prosecution hired the 1st BUGMAN to investigate. When his conclusions did not support the prosecution's contentions the prosecution refused to put him on the stand, even though the 1st BUGMAN has been repeatedly used and trusted by the PROSECUTION.

It's like a BIG NEON SIGN over FAULKNER'S HEAD saying THIS GUY IS TELLING THE TRUTH!

Now the prosecution is trying to bring in a guy from Hawaii (sir, do you speak English / No......Well, that will work!)in an attempt to find someone unfamiliar with the environment so he can come to a different conclusion that will support the "STORY" the prosecution has been trying to SELL. How much more obvious does it have to get ?

Would the prosecution have to hire a bug expert from PLUTO to get people to see the TRUTH?

Tell me, if you would, what the statistical probabilities that a bug expert from an ISLAND with a TROPICAL environment and different species and varieties of insects would give a more ACCURATE rending of the investigation than a LOCALLY BASED EXPERT that was ON SCENE with the BODY and did his investigation?

BTW, You seem to be doing a good job sticking to your guns and defending yourself, and making others think and prove what they say. I always admire that, no matter what 'side' you think you are on. :)

[paix]

What if Westerfield showed the motorhome to Brenda and Danielle was along. He had previously showed his kitchen to her. (At her request). Maybe Brenda conveniently forgot to mention the fact that she and her daughter were in the motorhome together at some point. Perhaps she and Danielle went in it together when it was parked and unlocked. Just to be snoopy, and Westerfield wasn't even aware they did.